"It should be obvious that buying locally produced food is worse for the environment, from the simple fact that it is more expensive. If buying food produced far away is cheaper, it follows that it is more efficient to produce food far away. After all, if it were more efficient to produce food locally, meaning that local producers have lowers expenses, and locally produced food also commands a price premium, it must be the case that locally produced food is more profitable. But if selling food locally were more profitable, why would anyone go to the trouble to produce food far from its consumer just to get lower profits? Ergo, the lower price of non-local food must reflect greater efficiency. And by definition, superior efficiency is better for the environment. After all, what is superior efficiency but the ability to produce at least as much product with fewer inputs of land, natural resources, energy, etc, and also less waste? If you are using less land, less energy, and fewer natural resources, all while producing less waste, how can that not be better for the environment? In short, greater economic efficiency is better for the environment. If you are paying a premium for "environmentally friendly" products, then it is a safe bet that you are hurting the environment."
I have to admit, the amount of time and money I put into my garden is break even at best. But I do what I can to feed the local deer.
Because of the vast acreages of crops required to feed large urban populations, you cannot grow enough “locally” to feed them all unless your real goal is to reduce population via starvation.
A horse and a cow can provide a family with necessary ingredients for a prosperous garden and the labor to make it easier.
Life is not that hard ..... as long as you're not going to work for someone else.
Ah - another step in the path to starving the masses into submission. Can’t have people being self sufficient and all...
Translation: Big Agriculture doesn’t like you buying from the little guy. You know, cuz of “science”.
Until its not available any longer. Anyone relying on food ingredients from Asia is now paying 4X costs vs. 14 months ago for ocean freight -- if you can even get a shipping container.
A railroad can move a ton of freight about 423 miles on average on a gallon of fuel.
About the amount of fuel a DC area commuter uses in a workday on average is enough to keep him supplied with California produce for a year.
You just have to recognize that you're building relationships and getting a good value, not saving the planet or the local economy.
And that's the point. I care about my family, first and foremost. I don't care about the plight of farmers in some distant area or the climate impact of my individualism, or the profit maximization of Archer Daniels-Midland.
The pandemic may have had an unintended (and maybe unwanted...) consequence of making people a little more self-sufficient and selfish. I know many people who now go to a farmer to buy meat vs Piggle Wiggly, and who uber-care if their canned goods come from Pennsylvania vs Transylvania.
Maybe they pay a little more for a steak from the cow down the interstate and green beans from the farmer 60 miles away, but their utility function's low weight on some imaginary carbon footprint is what frightens these concern trolls.
I am a foodie. I call it freedom of choice to be able to buy ingredients at all times of the year, but I am also pretty frugal. I have a garden and I also buy produce from local farmers, at a discount when compared to grocery stores. I don’t give a damn about climate change, carbon foot prints and other Marxist BS.
>>”It should be obvious that buying locally produced food is worse for the environment, from the simple fact that it is more expensive.”
This one sentence is so ridiculous in its premise and conclusion, that the rest of the article is a waste of time to read - utter garbage.
Sounds like BS paid for by Big Agriculture. Pure propaganda from the megacorporations.
Buy local, eat local.
What is missing from this equation is the use of pesticides and chemistry to increase yield, which people shopping at farmers’ markets tend to value.
Our local “farmer’s market” just uses the same suppliers that the grocery stores use.
But I’m going to corner the market with my Montana grown bananas.
Here’s how it works.
I found a history of potato crops in a part of our Midwest. It described in detail, the efforts and successes of overcoming pests and blights. The potatoes consequently did well and were plentiful for nearby big city populations, although they were a bit smaller than what we see from the northwest.
Enter big operations in states like Idaho and big potatoes. Production since then has been much more centralized. Don’t believe them, folks. More centralization gives us a more fragile agriculture system.
And the answer to the small potato problem? Soil in the Midwest needs to be more alkaline or lower in acid. The pH needs to be a little higher. Voila. Big potatoes. Don’t forget to rotate potatoes into other crop areas. It’s not good to repeatedly plant potatoes in soil that potatoes (and a few select other crops) grew in the previous year.
Labor problems? Teach your children well, and you’ll have good seasonal workers. Let them stay with their fathers. They won’t commit crimes or sins for you, as third world slaves do. But they’ll work.
There were good apple crops in the Midwest, too.
We listened to the globalists on manufacturing and where has that gotten us? Flooded with crap that breaks and unable to find much of anything made in America. The American farmers feed the world, they are the best, so now here come the globalists again with their nonsense, and you know where its going to get us if we are stupid enough to listen to them. We have to draw the line somewhere, I say its here.
There is no reason why people can’t eat well and affordably if they forgo all the prepackaged stuff and opt instead to cook real food.